New England as a Political Region: A Case Study of
Gubernatorial Elections
RESEARCH PAPER 9808
Christopher Kopp
1997-98 National Science Foundation Undergraduate Research Fellow
Mentor: Dr. Kenneth Martis, Professor of Geography
Regional Research Institute
West Virginia University
Morgantown, WV 26506-6825
New England as a Political Region: A Case Study of
Gubernatorial Elections
Introduction
Does New England exist? The term is widely used by geographers, politicians,
social scientists, and others to refer to the northeasternmost region in the United States.
Phrases and organizations associated with the area include New England puritanical
culture, the New England Governors Conference, the New England Patriots professional
football team, and many others. Yet is there still (or was there ever) a reason to
consolidate these states into such a grouping? To accomplish the primary goal of
assessing the political and electoral environment in New England, this paper first addresses
the validity of gathering these six separate states into a region. A close look reveals that
many factors are indeed common to the six New England states. These include, but are
not necessarily limited to, historical development, religion, values and ethics, and
economy.
Purpose
The first portion of the research examines the nature of the relationships between
the six New England states on several levels. First, historical research and documents will
be studied to determine the past links that have existed between these states. Second, the
research will consider change among these states over time and evaluate how, when, and
to what extent these changes significantly altered the landscape of New England
homogeneity throughout the last one and one-half centuries. Finally, the project seeks to
2
empirically study the uniformity of the region by measuring and assessing the gubernatorial
election results for the six states over the period from approximately 18561 to 1996.
Presumably, the data from these elections should reveal important conclusions about the
relationship dynamics between the New England states.
Methodology
Several steps were required to complete the many different objectives of this
project. Initially, a bibliography of collected works dealing with the history and
foundations of New England was compiled for use in establishing the history and common
traits among the region's states. From this collection, a background view of the area's
unique and purported bonding characteristics has been assembled. Also, the paper
considers changing factors and whether they caused shifts in the original uniform makeup
of the region. After the assessment of New England history, the project turns to empirical
analysis of gubernatorial elections since 1856, the first year for a competitive Republican
party that arose to challenge the Democrats. The project seeks to follow the overall
general fortunes of the Republican Party candidates since this date. Election results were
gathered from Congressional Quarterly's Guide to U.S. Elections and recorded in
spreadsheet format. For the purposes this study, Union candidates around the time of the
Civil War are counted as Republican candidates, because in virtually all cases, Unionists
affiliated themselves with the Republicans before and after the war. A graph charting the
percentages of the vote in each state for the Republican candidates over time was created.
This data was graphed against the 50 percent line and a least-squares trend line to clearly
demonstrate the years Republicans won and the overall direction of the party as the years
progressed. Furthermore, tables were created that display unusual aspects of the results.
3
Finally, conclusions are drawn from the overall trends in the data and an assessment of
New England as a homogenous political region is presented.
New England Historical and Cultural Characteristics
Historical Development
As one of the oldest settled regions in the United States, New England exhibits a
great deal of history. Since the landing of the Pilgrims in 1620, the area has grown
steadily, while generally maintaining many homogenous characteristics and exhibiting a
surprisingly great propensity for uniform political change. As researcher David Mayhew
points out:
"Since the establishment of two-partyism in the 1830's, the six states have
often responded as a section in critical periods. Consider their records, in
the pre-Civil War election of 1860, the Bryan election of 1896, and the
Goldwater election of 1964. In all three instances New England was quite
removed from the mainstream of American politics."2
Homogeneity seems to have been the norm for the New England region, especially in a
political sense, for nearly its entire history.
The governmental structures found in these states are particularly similar because
of historical trends dating back to the earliest settlement. These settlers placed particular
emphasis on the merits of small, individualized groupings of citizens who could maintain
themselves as whole through town meetings quite effectively. This form of daily operation
required a distinctly unique mode of administrative colonial organization. Most decisions
were made on a town-by-town basis, leading to the rise of primarily sovereign townships
4
with little or no higher authority. This characteristic persists even to this day, with New
England's current geographic boundaries dominated by unattached towns and cities.3
The unique growth pattern of New England cities and towns has had a significant
impact on the governing process as well. Both now and throughout its history, New
England governance has been organized according to the fundamental township structure.
Conspicuously absent from the governmental hierarchy are county-level political
structures. Although the six states have been carved into numerous counties for
administrative and census data collection purposes, no formal county governments exist.
All governing is undertaken either on the city/town level or the state level. This feature is
markedly different from the other states.4
A further governmental and political change grew out of immigration, migration,
and the intense urbanization and growth of cities. As the large cities continued to grow,
they became far too large for the town-meeting system to maintain itself as a viable
governmental option. Open, democratic practices unfortunately fell victim to the
secretive, dominating process of machine party politics.5 The largest cities spawned
rapidly growing suburbs containing mostly non-native (non-Yankee) New England
transplants that engulfed the previously isolated surrounding communities, challenging and
threatening the long-lasting Yankee political dominance in these smaller areas.
However, it is still very true that those small towns and cities that are far-removed
from the larger, more developed areas remain solidly isolated and independent, which have
always been key characteristics of New England heritage. The town meeting structure and
the tendency for town autonomy naturally go hand in hand quite well. The New England
states have even gone so far as to grant home-rule privileges to the municipalities, albeit
5
reluctantly. The New England states also share the peculiar trait of giving legislative
representation to each town, which has the effect of making their legislatures unusually
large.6
Religion
Religious principles often permeate all other aspects of social culture. Throughout
the New England states, traditional Puritan ethic and its legacies have dominated, but have
given way to other influences in more recent times. Scholars have often examined the
New England religious legacies.
Historians Alden T. Vaughan and Francis J. Bremer's Puritan New England
considers the regional borders and its religion as coincident in colonial America. The
book considers "the early settlers of New England and their impact on American thought
and culture" through Puritan legacies.7 It describes these legacies as fundamental and
indispensable to the growth and historical-cultural development of the New England
states.
Historian Paul R. Lucas assesses the outcomes and legacies of the Great
Awakening religious conversions that widely attracted believers throughout the entire
New England region. He refutes arguments that accept the movement as a product of
religious decline, Trans-Atlantic evangelicalism, regional class conflict, or the rise of
charismatic preachers like George Whitefield. Instead, he bases the wide religious
"rebirth" on the deviations in theological foundation and preaching style created by
Solomon Stoddard and adopted by his grandson, Jonathan Edwards, who became a
prominent figure in the movement. According to Lucas, Stoddard advocated preaching
the terrors of sin to create overwhelming fears of eternal damnation, a method employed
6
frequently by later Great Awakening leaders.8 These key actors had a profound impact on
the earliest religious movements in New England. These movements, in turn, became such
a deeply embedded foundation of religious ethics in the region that they maintained an
extremely strong grip on New England's cultural, social, and moral practices for hundreds
of years.
More recently however, the heavy influx of foreign laborers for this century's
increased industrial needs has caused a shift in balance of the region's religious base. As
many immigrants (particularly from Europe) flowed into the area, traditional staunch
Puritan practices became less dominant and were replaced or blurred by the influences
brought from elsewhere. Catholicism began to attain quite a formidable foothold in New
England society as the region grew up, urbanized, industrialized, and drew many new
foreigners to its labor markets. "In time, imposing Catholic churches took their places
alongside stately Congregational buildings."9
Values
Common values and beliefs represent the most significant bond among a unified
society. Societal values comprise ideology and morals, which can affect law, education,
politics, and other functions.
Historian Philip Gould relates the infamous Salem witch trials to political values at
the time. He comments that the "'bigotry' and 'superstition,' or 'zeal,' 'delusion,' and
'infatuation'…reflected the political and social anxieties rampant in the early republic".10
Religious conservatives "warned of 'the propensities and passions peculiar to human
nature'".11 Essentially, he asserts that massive regional political changes (including the rise
of parties and the democratization of politics) encouraged and maintained a feeling of
7
trepidation among the old guard, which feared practically any change in societal norms.12
All in all, a highly conservative ethic was born very early in New England, which
maintained a virtual stranglehold on both society and politics throughout the region for a
great number of years. This status quo-oriented society held firm until only recently, as
outside influences began to challenge the old guard in a meaningful way.
Legal specialist Richard J. Ross comments on "the intersection of legal history
with intellectual and cultural history," which he refers to as legal culture. He examines this
concept as it relates to the colonial New England states.13 He mentions the system's
unique characteristics, which "recognized or tolerated a hodgepodge of local
customs…applied different norms to different races, genders, occupations, and personal
statuses" and "comprised a variety of institutions with ill-defined and conflicting
responsibilities".14 He also refers to previous study showing how Puritan thought molded
the New England legal institution.15
Political scientist Duane Lockard considers the political environment unique to the
six New England states. He discusses each state singularly and draws conclusions and
connections derived from consolidated evidence. His primary focus involves the common
ethnic, policy-making, and party elements of New England society.16
Economy
Finally, economic concerns transcending state borders often signify regional
cohesion. The New England case is no exception. The geographical environment and
proximity produces many economic forces and considerations. Similar climate, soils,
vegetation and topographical features encourage common economic interests. For
example, mountainous and heavily wooded terrain combined with long, easily accessible
8
shorelines and harbors promoted strong timber and shipping industries in colonial New
England. Further, a new industrial New England arose due to available water power and
possibly to shortcomings in other sectors, including agriculture and mineral resources.17
Common employment sectors, in turn, generate similar economic needs and concerns.
Economist Stephen Innes concludes that New England colonists (particularly in
the Massachusetts Bay Colony) created a remarkably successful commonwealth
economically despite its capital and labor shortages. New England accomplished this feat
through extensive efforts to clear away the Old World economic restraints, including
guilds, monopolies, and price controls.18
Historians J. Fenstermaker and John E. Filer assert that during the 1807 U.S.
Embargo Act, the New England states distinctly represented the strongest and "most
financially sophisticated" economic sector of the United States, accounting for 28 percent
of all official U.S. exports.19 Therefore, the region experienced three significant economic
consequences far more than other states. These included initiation of economic
depression, increased smuggling between the United States and other countries, and
domestic manufacturing growth creating greater self-sufficiency.
Economic factors contributed heavily to the demographic makeup of the New
England area as well. Lockard and others have commented that the massive and rapid
industrialization process in these states (particularly in the southern states) necessitated an
immense labor force to accommodate these changing needs. The quickly shrinking farm
labor force could certainly not handle this additional requirement, which forced mill
owners to bring in the needed help from Europe and French Canada. The overall effect of
this change was a much more varied and heterogeneous population and work force.20
9
Another key aspect to the economic development of the New England area is its
history of urbanization patterns. Although the region demonstrated patchy development
with the southernmost states first experiencing the greatest effects, it tended to begin the
process of urbanization roughly at the same time. The level of industrial influence tended
to greatly affect the subsequent speed of the urbanization movement on a state-by-state
basis (with southern New England much more rapidly developed than its northern
counterpart), yet overall development began fairly uniformly in the region. Only small
differences can now be observed between the older, more agricultural, less industrially
concentrated north and the newer, more urbanized/industrialized south. Homogeneity
seems to be reestablishing itself as the dominant force in all aspects of New England life
and development.21
The overall outcome of this historical, social, and cultural development was to
create a New England region that was quite unique from other regions of the country.
Former Massachusetts Governor Michael Dukakis declared that "New England is, in many
ways, unique among America's regions".22 He sums up the New England area this way:
"It was, after all, the birthplace of the American Revolution…with its
tradition of political independence and local self-government…a center of
intellectual and academic life…with some of the nation's finest colleges and
universities [and] a vibrant and rapidly expanding high technology industry
since World War II. It was in New England that the industrial revolution in
America first began, [which] has been the cause of some of New England's
most difficult economic problems. New England politics have been shaped
by the incredible diversity of her people… and depends to a considerable
extent on its relationship with the federal government and…federal funds
and resources".23
In the broadest sense, he points to the fact that New Englanders have a sense of
shared identity that "has given New England a well-deserved reputation for fighting its
10
battles aggressively and effectively".24 It seems that New England exhibits many strong
ties that bind the region closely together. As Duane Lockard so aptly says,
"Notwithstanding the changes wrought by the last century particularly, there are many
elements of a common heritage operative in all the New England states".25
Gubernatorial Election Analysis
Having first examined and considered the historical and cultural ties that bind the
New England states together and the changes that may have caused a shift in the
uniformity of the region, this project now turns to a focus on empirical analysis of political
races. More specifically, it will assess the results of the gubernatorial elections since 1856
to reveal deeper conclusions about the states' political, ideological, and societal
orientations. These individual patterns, in turn, will be compared to determine the level of
homogeneity among the states in the New England region. Reasons for the nature and
changes of each individual state's elections will also be put forward in an attempt to better
explain the underlying dynamics of their historical development. The individual state
analyses are ordered starting with the most radically changed state, Vermont, and ending
with the least altered state, New Hampshire.
It is important to take note of the origins and history of the Republican Party on
the broad national scale to understand the dynamics of the individual state parties. The
party was founded in 1854 in response to the factional disputes and internal division
among many of the existing political parties, especially concerning the slavery issue. The
Democratic Party was torn by the Kansas-Nebraska Act, which allowed territories to
individually determine the legality of slavery according to the "popular sovereignty"
11
doctrine of the era. More importantly, however, was the breaking apart and eventual
collapse of the Whig Party. The Conscience Whigs of the North alienated themselves
from the southern factions of the party by declaring an anti-slavery position, which
subsequently brought about the total collapse of the party. In its place the new Republican
Party arose, primarily as the saving party of "good guys" to the northern states. This party
became particularly entrenched in the New England states early on because of its appeal to
the Yankee Protestants that dominated the region. They were attracted to the party's
conservative and individualistic appeals for reducing government, returning power to the
states, abolishing slavery, and encouraging free speech. The party officially began in the
northern Midwest, with a platform of free land and the denial of slavery to the western
territories. Eventually the movement grew, and the party ran John C. Fremont in the 1856
election for president. Four years later, they put forth Abraham Lincoln for the election
and the "party of Lincoln" was well underway to significant viability.
The pioneering, individualistic Yankees and their newfound fledgling party were
soon challenged, however. A strong anti-Democratic sentiment swept the original
inhabitants of the New England states in the decades leading up to the 20th century as
hordes of immigrants moved into the region. These laborers were moving to take
advantage of the booming industrialization needs of the North and by doing so, were
introducing new ethnic (often Irish), religious (Catholic), and social cultures into the area.
To the conservative Yankees looking to preserve their traditional way of life, these
somewhat liberal newcomers were seen as unwanted outsiders. The backlash that ensued
served to allow the Republican Party to establish a dominant foothold in the New England
states, but these "heroes" faltered increasingly as the Democratically-oriented immigrants
12
became more assimilated into the region's culture, particularly in the more urbanized and
industrialized sections.
Vermont
Vermont is one of the most unusual New England states in terms of gubernatorial
election trends. Its amazingly consistent support of Republican governors until the early
Graph 1 - Vermont
100
90
80
Percent of the Vote
70
60
Republican Percentages
50
50% Line
Linear Trendline
40
30
20
10
1992
1986
1980
1974
1968
1962
1956
1950
1944
1938
1932
1926
1920
1914
1908
1902
1896
1890
1884
1878
1872
1868
1865
1862
1859
1856
0
Years
1960s is even more astounding in light of the astonishing collapse of GOP candidates since
then. This dichotomy is clear from a quick glance at the graph of Vermont's election
results (See Graph 1). No Republican candidate failed to win election in this state from
1856 to 1962! 26 In fact, in the first election (1856) Republicans started strong, earning a
massive 74.3 percent of the vote, and this trend carried on for many years (See Appendix).
13
Table 1
New England Gubernatorial Elections
Political Parties After the Civil War
First Democratic Governor
After the Civil War
Years
Since 1856
Connecticut
1867
11
New Hampshire
1871
15
Massachusetts
1874
18
Maine
1878
22
Rhode Island*
1887
31
Vermont
1962
106
State
* A Fusion candidate won in 1860
After 1962, however, Republicans had much more difficulty attaining office. The
percentages of the vote after this year often dip below the 50 percent cutoff, revealing that
Republican victories are far less guaranteed. The drop-off is so pronounced, in fact, that
Vermont's trend line is the most negatively sloped of all New England states. Republican
dominance, once a fixture of Vermont politics, has declined so rapidly and significantly
that few, if any, remnants are left of the powerhouse party from its early years. A further
sign of this trend is the timing of the highs and lows for the state's election returns. In
1862 (only 7 years into Vermont GOP history), the Republican candidate received 88.5
percent of the vote (the highest Republican percentage for any competitive New England
election ever) while in the penultimate election (in 1994), the GOP hopeful took the
lowest percentage ever, at 19.4 percent (See Table 2). These figures reveal the great
collapse of the party over time. Despite this tremendous drop-off, however, the average
14
and median percentages of the vote for Vermont Republican gubernatorial candidates are
the highest (by far) of any of the six New England states, at 62.5 percent and 67 percent,
respectively (See Table 2). This phenomenon is the case only because the period of strong
Republican dominance lasted far longer than the current streak of Democratic influence.
However, if the current trend continues as seems likely, these indicators of central
tendency will slip ever closer to the 50 percent mark. Clearly, Vermont experienced a
long and pronounced history of total Republican dominance, followed by a quickly
dramatic and equally significant decline and shift toward Democratic governors.
Notwithstanding this major shift in the last few decades, the electoral history of Vermont
can best be characterized by stability and one-party dominance, regardless of which party
is in control.
Table 2
New England Gubernatorial Elections
Central Tendency and High/Low Figures for Republican Percentages
State
Mean Median High (Year) Low (Year) High/Low Gap
Vermont
62.5
67 88.5 (1862) 19.4 (1994)
69.1
Maine
53.5
54.1 70.3 (1944) 23.1 (1974)
47.2
Rhode Island
52.7
51.6 87.5 (1874) 21.5 (1974)
66
New Hampshire
52.5
52.4 69.9 (1994) 33.2 (1964)
36.7
Massachusetts
52.5
51.9 77.5 (1866) 25.3 (1913)
52.2
Connecticut
48.7
49.5 66.2 (1924) 10.1 (1856)
56.1
Industrialization has a great deal to do with the political development of all the
New England states, and Vermont exhibits these tendencies clearly. The timing and rates
of industrialization often influence urbanization patterns of that state. In this case,
Vermont remained more rural and less industrialized than its neighbors until only the last
15
several decades. After the Civil War, the famous Proctor family began a marble industry
that became a massive influence on both the economy and politics of the state. This
conservative Republican family used their industrial strength to dominate the political
arena for virtually a century, until Democrats slowly broke into the system in the 1950s
and 1960s.27 The family had little significant competition economically in the state for
much of the time that it held power. The marble corporation was the largest employer in
the state during this time and it relied on this advantage to gain support among the mostly
rural and already conservative population that it employed. From 1878 to the mid-1900s,
the family supplied four state governors, a United States Senator, and many other state
and local officials. Only the machine tool industry in Vermont came close to rivaling the
Proctors, but it also provided two Republican governors and a United States Senator. 28
Industrial and mining interests established a Republican hegemony over the state's
elections that was only occasionally challenged by rural Republican candidates. In fact,
researcher William Doyle points out that, "During the post-Civil War period the only real
contests were in the Republican primaries. The winner of the primary was virtually
assured of winning the election."29
As with all dominant powers, however, the Republican party began to crack and
slowly falter against Democratic candidates. Many consider the turning point to be the
strong Democratic showing during the 1952 elections. Just ten years later, Vermont
would elect its first Democrat governor and the trends immediately swung in favor of this
party in the executive office.30 The urbanization and industrialization processes that had
slowly begun in the 1930s was now taking greater hold, although Vermont experienced
these movements far later and at a much slower rate than the other states. This slow
16
development is responsible for Vermont's prolonged Republican dominance relative to the
other New England states.31
Rhode Island
Over the nearly one and one half century encompassed in this study, no New
England state has been as dynamic politically as Rhode Island. Republican candidates
have experienced sharp ups and downs in electoral success over the entire course of the
party's history in this state, as reflected by the jagged nature of its graph (See Graph 2).
Graph 2 - Rhode Island
100
90
80
Percent of the Vote
70
60
Republican Percentages
50
50% Line
Linear Trendline
40
30
20
10
1994
1984
1976
1968
1960
1952
1944
1936
1928
1920
1912
1908
1904
1900
1896
1892
1888
1884
1880
1876
1872
1868
1864
1860
1856
0
Years
The first Republican candidate started the GOP fortunes off well, earning nearly 60
percent of the vote, yet this trend lasted only a few years before the party fell to defeat in
1860. However, although Republicans lost in 1860, it was not until 1887 (a full 31 years
after the first GOP election) that a Democratic candidate wound up in the executive
office.32 So, although Republican power was unstable, it did maintain a great deal of early
17
control over the elections. However, this up-and-down sequence has consistently lasted
over the duration of the state's history. Not only have year to year results been extremely
varied, but also overall results have shown the Republican party to be in steep decline.
The trend line for this state is more negatively sloped those of all states but one
(Vermont), indicating that the party is experiencing significant decline in success in
gubernatorial elections. As an excellent example of this phenomenon, Rhode Island
Republicans earned their greatest victory in competitive elections during the early years (in
1874) by receiving 87.533 percent of the vote and posted its poorest showing ever in more
recent times by earning just 21.5 percent in 1974 (See Table 2). An overall glance at the
graph shows it crossing the 50 percent line just after the turn of the century, which serves
as a fairly good breaking point for the two eras of Rhode Island gubernatorial history. An
interesting aspect of the graph is its opposite symmetry. High GOP percentages dominate
early gubernatorial history in Rhode Island, then these scores dwindle to hug the 50
percent line in the middle of the graph, and finally drop off considerably at the end to
levels nearly as low as the early scores were high (See Graph 2). The mean (52.7) and
median (51.6) percentages of the vote rank third and fourth, respectively (See Table 2).
These figures show that although huge early successes were widespread for the
Republican party, it has weakened so severely that now its overall strength is merely
average. Based on recent results, it is expected that as the years continue to progress,
Rhode Island will increasingly become dominated by the Democrats much to the same
extent that Republicans once held power, and that the Republican average percentage of
the vote will drop further. Republican gubernatorial presence has waned mightily over the
period since 1856, and is clearly weak at the present time.
18
Rhode Island has virtually always been a one-party state in New England because
of its ethnic base. Much of its history has been dominated by Yankee Protestants, who
typically chose the more conservative Republican Party candidates that were aligned with
their interests. As industrialization arose in the state, however, the need for labor drew
large amounts of immigrants to the region to challenge the Yankees. These newcomers
tended to be overwhelmingly Catholic and strong supporters of the Democratic Party. In
time, Rhode Island actually grew to be the most heavily populated Catholic state in the
nation, which created an overwhelming percentage of registered Democrats among the
state population.34 Because this century's registered voters have been so overwhelmingly
slanted toward Democrats, Rhode Island has exhibited a sharp division between two oneparty eras: the Republican period from the Civil War to the early 20th century, and the
Democratic age from that point to the present. Rhode Island provides excellent lessons on
the connections between industrial needs, urbanization, and patterns of migration among
ethnic groups. These three forces have combined to generate a pronounced shift from
early Republican dominance to later Democratic power in this state.
Maine
Maine's political landscape is much more one-sided than many of the other states.
In fact, Republicans tended to dominate the gubernatorial elections until the last thirty or
forty years. Since the late 1960s and early 1970s, Republicans have failed miserably (See
Graph 3).
19
However, before this most recent period, Republicans consistently dominated the
political scene in the state. The Republican candidate first won by plurality in 1854, and it
was 22 years (1878) before another Democrat came to power (See Table 1). Republican
Graph 3 - Maine
100
90
80
Percent of the Vote
70
60
Republican Percentages
50
50% Line
Linear Trendline
40
30
20
10
1994
1982
1970
1960
1954
1948
1942
1936
1930
1924
1918
1912
1906
1900
1894
1888
1882
1878
1875
1872
1869
1866
1863
1860
1857
1854
0
Years
power has been a staple of Maine politics until only very recently. The overall trend line
slopes moderately downward, indicating a slide in GOP power, but most of this decline
can be attributed to only the most recent decades. In fact, if any trend is apparent, it is
that the decades immediately preceding the period of decline saw the largest Republican
victories of any era. This emergence is particularly interesting in light of the Democratic
ideology sweeping the nation at this time. In 1944, Republicans attained their highest
percentage of the vote ever in the state at 70.3 percent. Meanwhile, the truly low
percentages have only been attained recently. Through 1970, the party never got less than
20
40 percent, but in 1974, the Republican candidate received the lowest percentage ever for
a GOP candidate in Maine--23.1 percent (See Table 2). The low Republican total came
about from the emergence of the first-ever Independent gubernatorial candidate in the
state, James B. Longley. Longley ran a victorious campaign in 1974 and paved the way
for Independent success in subsequent elections. The rise of this "third party" has cut into
Republican success significantly and results have remained quite poor for the party ever
since that election. The 1974 election result ranks among the lowest in any of the New
England states, but the highest percentage is only moderate compared to the others. The
indication from this data is that the Maine Republican party was moderately strong over
much of the state's history, but that it has weakened very considerably in the last few
years. The party's original strength, however, has helped it maintain its overall strong
average and median percentages of the vote at 53.5 percent and 54.1 percent, respectively
(See Table 2). These figures rank second only to staunchly Republican Vermont among
New England states.
Maine's long history of moderate, but frequently prevalent Republican power
during its first century of existence and subsequent decline since that time can be traced to
several underlying factors. Maine was a state overwhelmingly controlled by a few elite
interest groups and economic organizations that dominated the system.35 One-party
dominance was originally established by the Republicans' excellence in setting up political
control through a well-organized leadership selection process.36 However, these trends
have been changing rapidly and significantly, as shown by the state's gubernatorial election
history. Republicans have more recently been winning elections only by sheer
21
momentum from previous years than from successful organization. Kenneth P. Hayes
points out that:
"The Republican party, faced with significant challenges for the first time in
a hundred years, was unable to respond effectively. The party had become
so accustomed to success that the mechanisms for winning were forgotten.
Consequently, new voters were either mobilized by the Democrats or
remained unenrolled."37
Democrats, who could previously only rely on isolated groups of Franco-Americans,
Catholics, liberals, and ambitious lawyers, could now challenge as an emerging majority.38
These changes are due to instability within the system itself and more frequent Democratic
victories brought about by three key developments over the last half-century.39
Republicans in Maine have suffered mightily in recent elections because of their lack of
control in an era of "post-New Deal political styles" characterized by "reduced
commitment to parties, rapid shifts in voter support for parties, and increased influence of
personality and media candidates."40 Coupled with this lower propensity to commit to
parties is the extreme rise of independents in Maine. The ranks of independent voters
have been swelling for decades in Maine, and these voters have tended to vote like
Democrats in many recent elections.41 They also frequently support the Independent
candidate for governor when not swaying to the Democratic candidate. In fact, the state
currently has an Independent governor, Angus King. Therefore, with new voters generally
joining the ranks of the Democrats (including traditionally Republican wealthy Protestants)
or Democratically-leaning Independents, Maine has seen a massive shift in its political
ideology during the last few decades. Finally, the most significant change may be the
election of Edmund Muskie to the office of governor in 1954. He helped to bring about a
22
resurgence in the Maine Democratic Party (and two-party politics) by winning election
over an unpopular Republican incumbent using a coalition of dissident Republicans,
Franco-Americans, and Jacksonian Democrats. After breaking through the Republican
stranglehold on the office, he established himself as one of the most capable and effective
politicians to ever come from the state of Maine, which began to sway voters even more
toward the emerging Democrats.42 All these factors, when taken together, provide an
important picture of the political climate and its changes in Maine's history. Indeed, it was
noted in 1983 and remains true today that "Maine continues to drift toward the
Democratic party even as the nation swings to the right."43 In time, this statement may be
revised to indicate the arrival of a consistently powerful Independent spirit as well.
Massachusetts
Massachusetts ranks as one of the most fluctuating and dynamic environments for
Graph 4 - Massachusetts
100
90
80
60
Republican Percentages
50
50% Line
Linear Trendline
40
30
20
10
0
18
55
18
59
18
63
18
67
18
71
18
75
18
79
18
83
18
87
18
91
18
95
18
99
19
03
19
07
19
11
19
15
19
19
19
26
19
34
19
42
19
50
19
58
19
66
19
82
Percent of the Vote
70
Years
23
two party gubernatorial politics. Republicans held a great deal of power during much of
the 19th century, but this century has seen much more competitiveness and swaying
allegiances in Massachusetts voting patterns. However, even in the strongly Republican
eras during the late 1800s, no GOP candidate was assured of an easy victory. In fact,
Massachusetts election results are distinctively marked by sharp upturns and downturns
from year to year, rather than broad trends over longer periods (See Graph 4). This
feature distinguishes the state very noticeably from others such as Maine, Connecticut, and
New Hampshire, which contain much more consistency in voting trends. Also, despite
19th century Republican dominance, Massachusetts's Republican gubernatorial candidates
got off to a horrible start. By earning only 27 percent of the vote in 1855 (the first
Republican-contested election in the state), the Massachusetts GOP joined Connecticut as
the only two New England state Republican parties to not elect their candidate as
governor in the first election.
Also like Connecticut, Massachusetts has a significantly flatter downward-sloping
trend line, indicating waning Republican dominance but to a far lesser extent than most
states (See Graph 4). Competitiveness marks Massachusetts politics, particularly in the
last few decades. This general competitiveness is reflected in several unique aspects of the
state's gubernatorial election results. First, average (52.5) and median (51.9) Republican
percentages of the vote in this state are equal to or lower than scores in all states except
Connecticut (See Table 2).44 This phenomenon seems to indicate what is also true about
Connecticut's politics--Massachusetts Republican gubernatorial candidates have been
successful overall, but relatively weaker than in other New England states. Second, the
sharp ups and downs that characterize the graph intensify during the last half-century,
24
meaning that party competition is only growing in the state. Third, Massachusetts elected
a Democratic candidate fairly quickly after 1856, in 1874. This marks a period of only 18
years before Republican dominance was broken and Democrats were able to take the
executive office (See Table 1). This period ranks third among New England states in
length, trailing closely behind Connecticut (11 years) and New Hampshire (15 years).
Finally, fairly extreme high and low scores in Massachusetts seem to indicate that
Republican fortunes can head in any direction at any given time. The high of 77.5 percent
(in 1866) ranks third to the highs of Rhode Island and Vermont, while the low of 25.3
percent (in 1913) is lower than all states but Maine, Rhode Island, and Vermont (Please
see Chart 2). All these factors, when taken together, seem to lead to the conclusion that
the Republican party is unstable and not particularly strong in Massachusetts.
Instability among Republicans in Massachusetts is directly attributable to intense,
two-party competition typical in the more industrialized southern New England states.
Since the Civil War, Republicans (led by classic Yankees of Protestant origin) and
Democrats (headed by immigrants such as the Irish Catholics) have dueled for political
control of the state. Early Republican dominance during the first 50+ years after the Civil
War was a fixture of the state's politics, but this power gave way as it has in all other New
England states. World War I truly marked the point where division of the two groups
became extreme and where the Irish began to take a much more dominant role in local and
state politics.45 At first, the emergence of these Democrats only occurred at the local
level, which could be compared "merely to cracks in the Republican wall."46 However, the
party has continued to rise in subsequent years. Recently, Democrats outnumber
Republicans in reverse proportion.47 Urbanization and industrialization have brought
25
significant numbers of outside immigrant laborers into the area with strong Democratic
ties, much like the rest of the southern New England states. Republicans tend to be
"middle-class white-collar people who are often the friends and relatives of minor public
officials."48 Finally, the sharp up-and-down nature of the Massachusetts graph is due in
large part to the state's town meeting, nonpartisan mentality where voters view voting as
an opportunity to throw the controlling party out of power for its failings, regardless of
political affiliation. Massachusetts voters are becoming far more Democratic-leaning in
addition to their long-standing tradition of fickle approval of elected officials.
Connecticut
In many ways, Connecticut is completely different from the rest of the New
England states. Consistent party competitiveness has ruled this state all along. From the
outset of Republican emergence in the region, Connecticut has maintained the most
Graph 5 - Connecticut
100
90
80
60
Republican Percentages
50
50% Line
Linear Trendline
40
30
20
10
0
18
56
18
59
18
62
18
65
18
68
18
71
18
74
18
78
18
84
18
90
18
96
19
02
19
08
19
14
19
20
19
26
19
32
19
38
19
44
19
50
19
62
19
74
19
86
Percent of the Vote
70
Years
26
indifference to the prevailing trends among New Englanders to unfailingly support
Republican candidates for governor. In fact, in 1856, the Republican Party got off to a
horrible start here, earning only about 10 percent of the vote. Meanwhile, all other New
England states recorded Republican scores of at least 27 percent in the first year of that
party's emergence (See Appendix). Indeed, all other states except Massachusetts saw
Republican challengers win election in the first year of candidacy, while Connecticut
obviously lagged far behind.
Furthermore, among the five state graphs with downward sloping trend lines,
Connecticut has a significantly flatter (less negative) line associated with its graph (See
Graph 5). This phenomenon indicates a great deal of competitiveness among the two
major parties in the state. Republican dominance similar to that found in a large part of
the other states' histories is conspicuously absent here. The two parties have been
consistently competitive and the numbers convincingly support this conclusion. The most
successful Republican candidate only received 66.2 percent of the vote (in 1924) and other
than the 1856 election, the worst showing by a Republican was 35.5 percent (in 1912).
These scores represent the least extreme highs and lows of any Republican candidate in
any of the New England states (See Table 2). These numbers would seem to indicate that
although Republicans are not unpopular in Connecticut, they are certainly not worshipped.
As a further indication of a lack of Republican influence, the average (48.7
percent) and median (49.5 percent) percentages of the vote for the GOP in Connecticut
are both below 50 percent over the entire history of the party (See Table 2). These are the
only such figures below 50 percent for any of the states. Finally, Connecticut was the first
to break the mold of Republican strangleholds over the states' executive offices when it
27
elected a Democratic governor just 11 years after Republican emergence in 1856, a far
shorter time than any other New England state (See Table 1).
Several unique characteristics of Connecticut contribute to its tendency toward
competitiveness. As early as 1959, Lockard noted that "Few states, and certainly none in
New England, have equalled the closeness of party competition in Connecticut during the
last generation".49 As one of the most industrialized states in the nation, Connecticut has
long been far ahead of its New England neighbors in terms of urbanization.50
Manufacturing accounted for twenty-seven percent of its income by 1981 and it ranked as
one of the wealthiest states in the nation in terms of per capita personal income. Massive
firearms, munitions, gunpowder, textile, and shipbuilding industries in the state since the
1850s necessitated a close relationship between themselves and the sympathetic
Republican party. However, these industries were a double-edged sword for Republicans
because the heavy labor requirements that they also needed brought immigrants from
elsewhere who would vote for the liberal, more pro-union Democrats and upset the cozy
balance. A sharp and fairly equal line of competition has formed between the two parties
in these states since the Civil War as owners and service providers (such as insurers,
financial institutions, etc.) associated with the Republican party have clashed with the
laborers and urban poor of the Democratic party. In fact, "[f]ollowing the Civil War there
was a close relationship between Connecticut's industries and the Republican party."51
Meanwhile, the expanding labor force has challenged the formerly extreme English
conservatism that dominated before the War and has tended to favor an emphasis on social
programs such as welfare and education, long endorsed by Democrats. Republicans
control the smaller rural towns and cities with wealthier conservatives, while Democrats
28
dominate the urban centers and ethnic groups. The intense and long-standing competition
found here has resulted in competitive, two-party elections at all levels.
New Hampshire
New Hampshire is truly politically unique among all the New England states in
many ways. The electoral history of the region is significantly different from the rest
primarily because of the two-part nature of the gubernatorial election results. Until nearly
the turn of the 20th century, the state's elections were characterized by close, hard fought
battles that resulted in very small margins of victory. The Republican candidate won
Graph 6 - New Hampshire
100
90
80
Percent of the Vote
70
60
Republican Percentages
50
50% Line
Linear Trendline
40
30
20
10
18
57
18
61
18
65
18
69
18
73
18
77
18
82
18
90
18
98
19
06
19
14
19
22
19
30
19
38
19
46
19
54
19
62
19
70
19
78
19
86
19
94
0
Years
virtually every time, but the wins were rarely, if ever, easy or convincing landslides. Then,
however, the trend changed markedly in the late 1800s and carried throughout the rest of
this century. Republicans continued to win at a high rate, but now they were fairly
29
consistently receiving much higher percentages of the vote. In fact, this unusual
dichotomy (compared to other New England states with waning Republican influence) has
made New Hampshire the only New England state with a positively sloped trend line (See
Graph 6). Republican power seems to be growing here rather than dying.
As a further indication of this trend, New Hampshire elected the Republican
gubernatorial candidate in 1994 more overwhelmingly than any other GOP hopeful in the
state's history, with a strong 69.9 percent of the vote. The most recent elections seem to
have produced the most lopsided races ever in the state, and Republicans have won most
of these landslides. In addition, Republicans have never fared poorly relative to the other
states. No state has a higher low score than New Hampshire's 33.2 percent, which also
seems to indicate that even when Republican fortunes are down, they are not completely
powerless (See Table 2). These candidates even started off strong, earning a victory in the
party's first election (1857) and maintaining wins for several years. Although Republicans
relinquished power only 15 years after taking over in 1857 (second shortest to
Connecticut's 11 years), the Democratic victory was simply a short-lived aberration (See
Table 1). GOP candidates have received an average of 52.5 percent of the vote (a close
fourth to Vermont, Maine, and Rhode Island) and a median of 52.4 percent (third to
Vermont and Maine). These figures are not particularly high, but are still significantly
higher than 50 percent (See Table 2). Overall, it would seem that the New Hampshire
Republican gubernatorial candidates are politically strong and have fared very well in the
state's general elections. Furthermore, the success of these candidates seems to be
increasing over time, while all other states have seen dwindling Republican influence.
30
New Hampshire's politics has often been described as the "Triumph of
Conservatism" for several reasons.52 The state has maintained a substantial preference for
Republican governors during most of its history. Democrats challenged this conservative
ethic only momentarily within the last several decades as political events transpired to
undermine the Republican party. The election of Democrats to both a U.S. Senate seat
and to the governor's office in the mid-1960s was originally viewed as a watershed period
for party competition in the state. The Republican party seemed to be in factional
disarray, while Democrats appeared to present voters with a personally appealing, less
factional, and more moderate choice.53 New Hampshire's intense population growth at
this time was viewed as a positive for Democrats because of the presumed urbanization
boom and because of the fact that party registration was shifting significantly in favor of
the Democrats.
However, events have since shifted to favor New Hampshire's Republicans once
again because of two key developments. First, massive suburban migration has taken the
place of the urban movements as the state increases its population. Greater numbers of
suburbanites usually translates into increased support for Republican party politics, and
New Hampshire is no exception. Second, industry development in New Hampshire has
shown a decline in traditional union, labor-intensive industries such as textiles to nonunion high-tech software and computer manufacturing over the last few decades. These
types of firms are less labor-intensive and more capital-oriented than other heavy
industries common to the New England area. The entrepreneurs that run these companies
tend to be associated with the Republican party and without a massive industrial labor
31
force to offset this tendency, the GOP has experienced major gains in the most recent
gubernatorial elections.
Tables
In an effort to further understand the underlying trends involved in New England
politics (especially with regard to gubernatorial elections), several additional charts have
been created that examine the state elections by eras. They explore the percentages of
time that Republican candidates have held office in each of the states and in New England
as a whole. These charts look at the Third Party System (1856-1894), the Fourth Party
System (1895-1932), the Fifth Party System (1933-1996), the Democrat-Republican era
(1856-1996), and the 20th century (1900-1996). The major party systems are
distinguished by major events that alter the party structures and balance. The Third Party
System begins with the rise of the Republican Party and ends with a major depression that
gives a boost to the GOP and hurts the Democrats, who were in power at this time. The
Fourth Party System includes a period of Republican prominence nationwide, and
concludes with the Democratic takeover at the onset of the Great Depression. Finally, the
Fifth Party System encompasses the major part of the 20th century during which the
Democrats have been the party of choice nationally.
The Third Party System (See Table 3) in New England was the period of greatest
strength for Republican governors in New England. Despite Democratic power
elsewhere, New England Republican gubernatorial candidates held office nearly 88 percent
of the time. With the exception of Connecticut, which has consistently been competitive
all along, most states have had overwhelming proportions of Republican governors. Most
elected GOP candidates between 87 and 95 percent of the time, while Vermont registered
32
a perfect 100 percent. The only aberration was Connecticut, which chose Republicans for
only about 67 percent of the years during this era.
Table 3
New England Gubernatorial Elections
Total Republican Gubernatorial Years by Eras
The Third Party System 1856-1894
State
Years (39)
Percent
Connecticut
26
66.7
Massachusetts
34
87.2
Rhode Island
34
87.2
Maine
35
89.7
New Hampshire
37
94.9
Vermont
39
100
New England Average
87.6
As Republicans began to increase in strength nationwide during the Fourth Party
System (See Table 4), New Englanders maintained their loyalty to the party. Again during
this period, the overall Republican percentage of time in office was nearly 88 percent, but
the individual state alignment had shifted significantly. All states but Vermont (with
another perfect 100 percent) fell somewhere close to the 80-90 percent range.
Massachusetts was the lowest, electing GOP candidates only 79 percent of the time (as
compared to 87 percent in the first era), Rhode Island dropped from 87 to 84 percent,
Connecticut rose substantially from 67 to 84 percent, New Hampshire dropped from 95 to
90 percent, and Maine held constant at about 90 percent. Overall, three states declined in
Republican influence, two remained constant, and only one increased. These figures are
33
somewhat surprising in an era of national Republican prominence, but not when
considering that these states were already heavily dominated by Republican governors
before the era began.
In the Fifth Party System (See Table 5), the influence of national trends is
apparent. Democrats have clearly taken over or at least become highly competitive in all
but one state, New Hampshire. The overall percentage of Republicans holding office in
New England during this era dips markedly from previous terms to 51 percent, reflecting a
growing balance of two-party competition in these states. Although New Hampshire has
maintained its heavy preference for Republicans, it too has seen a slight decline in the
percentage of GOP governors (from 90 to 84 percent). All other states have declined
substantially in the past 64 years. Connecticut and Rhode Island have recorded the lowest
percentages by far at 28 percent (down from 84 percent the previous era).
Table 4
New England Gubernatorial Elections
Total Republican Gubernatorial Years by Eras
The Fourth Party System 1895-1932
State
Years (38)
Percent
Massachusetts
30
78.9
Rhode Island
32
84.2
Connecticut
32
84.2
New Hampshire
34
89.5
Maine
34
89.5
Vermont
38
100
New England Average
87.6
34
Table 5
New England Gubernatorial Elections
Total Republican Gubernatorial Years by Eras
The Fifth Party System 1933-1996
S ta te
Years (64)
Percent
Connecticut
18
28.1
Rhode Island
18
28.1
Massachusetts
30
46.9
Maine
33
51.6
Vermont
43
67.2
New Hampshire
54
84.4
New England Average
51.1
Massachusetts and Maine straddle the 50 percent mark at 47 and 52 percent, respectively,
and Vermont ranks somewhat higher at 67 percent. Clearly, the Republican prowess has
waned mightily in this last era.
The Democrat-Republican era (See Table 6) reflects and encompasses the many
changes that have taken place during the three smaller periods. The most notable
conclusion from this data is that no state has had Republican governors for less than 50
percent of its history since the party arose. The figure for all of New England is 71
percent, which still demonstrates a very healthy overall preference for Republicans,
although most of this is due to the heavy dominance of the party in the early years.
Another significant conclusion from this data involves pairings of the states. Connecticut
35
(54 percent) and Rhode Island (60 percent), Massachusetts (67 percent) and Maine (72
percent), and Vermont (85 percent) and New Hampshire (89 percent) can each be
matched based upon highly similar percentages. The first pair are those southern urban
states where Republicans are the minority gubernatorial party, the second are a mix of
rural (Maine) and urban (Massachusetts) states in which there are evenly competitive
parties, and the third are those more rural states where the Republican Party is still
dominant. Finally, it is interesting to note that the top three and bottom three states are
split along geographic lines. The more Republican states are in more rural northern New
England, while the lower tier consists of the more urbanized and industrialized southern
New England states.
Table 6
New England Gubernatorial Elections
Republican Governors
Democrat-Republican Era 1856-1996
State
Years (141)
Percent
Connecticut
76
53.9
Rhode Island
84
59.6
Massachusetts
94
66.7
Maine
102
72.3
Vermont
120
85.1
New Hampshire
125
88.7
New England Average
71.1
36
Very little of the results change if the era is restricted to only the 20th century
because this period comprises more than two-thirds of the total era (See Table 7). The
state pairings are still clearly evident, and the northern-southern dichotomy is still a factor.
However, the major change deals with the lower percentages found across the board.
Because much of the 20th century is made up of the Fifth Party System (dominated by
Democrats), it includes far lower percentages than the total Democrat-Republican era.
These percentages range from 46 to 86 percent, rather than the range for the entire era (54
to 89 percent). This decline clearly shows that the 20th century (and particularly the
period starting in 1933) has been extremely difficult for Republican gubernatorial
candidates in New England.
Table 7
New England Gubernatorial Elections
Republican Governors
Twentieth Century 1900-1996
State
Years (97)
Percent
Connecticut
45
46.4
Rhode Island
45
46.4
Massachusetts
55
56.7
Maine
62
63.9
Vermont
76
78.4
New Hampshire
83
85.6
New England Average
62.9
37
Conclusions
After the examination of the data, three broad conclusions about politics and life in
the New England states become apparent. These issues form the central theme of this
project and help to more clearly understand the dynamics involved in the region. These
three important questions will be answered based upon findings throughout this paper.
The questions include: 1) "Is New England still truly a homogenous region?", 2) "How
have the Republican gubernatorial candidates fared in the long term?", and 3) "Is there a
significant difference between political ideologies of the states within New England?".
Homogenous Region?
Finally, this project has sought to understand the early uniform beginnings of the
six New England states and to assess whether that homogeneity has been maintained.
Based on the gubernatorial election histories of these states, it appears that only in the
most general terms is the region still uniformly unique. The trait that best characterizes
most of the states is a decline in preference for Republican governors. This feature,
however, is not even applicable to all states. New Hampshire GOP candidates are
becoming more successful as the years progress. Beyond that aberration, the different
states have seen Republican decline occur at very different rates and times and to greatly
different extents. States like Vermont and Maine seem to have maintained Republican
influence the most, while those such as Connecticut and Rhode Island have shown a
preference for Democratic candidates from the early stages of its history. With some
states considering Republicans to be a minority party while others see them as an
overwhelming majority, it is difficult to consider the region to be homogenous. From this
38
data, it appears as though there is no such phenomenon as the "Solid North" to match the
uniformity of the states in the southern United States.
Waning Republican Power?
The sharp decline of Republican prominence throughout all New England states is
the clearest outcome of these findings. In all but one case (New Hampshire), the state
trend lines have been negatively (downward) sloped, and many have been extremely steep.
These results reveal the significant and rapid decline of the party in New England
gubernatorial elections. Also, the decreasing percentage of time in office for Republican
governors show that all states are in a steady and rapid shift toward more liberal,
Democratic ideals. In short, virtually every piece of data that was collected indicates a
massive decline in what was once a powerful Republican dynasty in New England.
North vs. South?
In a nutshell, there now does seem to be a basis to distinguish between the
northern and southern New England states. Researchers have long considered the two
subregions to be very different because of their varying patterns and speeds of
industrialization. This study seems to support that hypothesis as true for the 20th (and
probably 21st) century primarily because of the trends revealed in Tables 6 and 7. The
strong impact of immigrant, unionized labor voting (which tends to choose Democrats
over Republicans) in the heavily industrialized areas of southern New England has
seemingly caused a significant downward shift in the amount of time that Republican
governors have been in office this century. Northern New England has experienced less
industrialization and immigration than its southern neighbors, and has been able to remain
more conservative and Republican-oriented in its choices for governor. As mentioned
39
earlier, the northern New England states have had Republicans in office far more than the
southern states have in this century, which seems to lend credence to the argument that
now, "There are two New Englands."54
In the broadest sense, New England politics have been shaped by the patterns of
industrialization and urbanization that took place in the region over the past century and a
half. As states began to industrialize, more labor was required, which drew immigrants
from elsewhere to New England. These immigrants were often of varied ethnic groups,
Catholic, economically liberal and socially conservative. As conservative Yankees
declined relative to these newcomers, a liberal Democratic shift shook the region.
Urbanization usually accompanied the processes of industrialization, creating legions of
city-dwellers such as Boston's Irish population, who were far more attuned to Democratic
ideals and supported them accordingly. Varied rates of industrialization served as the
fundamental factor in the mismatched patterns of Republican decline between the states.
The southern states, which urbanized quickly, shifted toward Democratic party politics far
sooner than their northern neighbors. However, the northern New England population has
become much more urban in the last few decades and, with the exception of New
Hampshire, Republican ideals have faltered accordingly. In general it can be said that:
"Among the people of the six New England states are the immigrants who
came to the northeast during and since the late nineteenth century. The
political climate dramatically differed from one of very little governmental
support of social programs to one of governmentally supported programs
and to control by new political groups."55
The Democrats seem to be taking over the politics of the entire region as these massive
changes continue to sweep across all the New England states.
40
Overall, this project revealed some very important lessons about the culture,
lifestyle, and most importantly, political ideology of the New England region. The data
did contain some surprises, but overall, the results seemed to fit with expectations. New
England, once a strongly unified region, is now a varied mix of conservative and liberal,
old and new, natives and immigrants, and most importantly, Republican, Democrat and
Independent. Extreme party competition seems to be facing these states in the future and
for many years to come.
41
Appendix: Gubernatorial Election
Data, 1854-1996
Connecticut
Republican Percentages
1856 1857 1858 1859 1860 1861 1862 1863 1864 1865 1866
10.1 50.4 51.8 51.1 50.3 51.2 56.5 51.6 53.8 57.5 50.3
Maine
Republican Percentages
1854 1855 1856 1857 1858 1859 1860 1861 1862 1863 1864
49.5 46.6 57.4
56 53.5 55.8 56.5 58.7 53.3 57.4 58.6
Massachusetts
Republican Percentages
1855 1856 1857 1858 1859 1860 1861 1862 1863 1864 1865
26.9
0 46.6 57.6
54 61.6 67.1 59.5 70.7 71.8 76.6
New Hampshire
Republican Percentages
1857 1858 1859 1860 1861 1862 1863 1864 1865 1866 1867
51.9 53.4 52.5 53.1 52.9 51.5 43.8 54.2 54.9 53.5 52.2
Rhode Island
Republican Percentages
1856 1857 1858 1859 1860 1861 1862 1863 1864 1865 1866
58.3 65.3
69 71.3 46.6 46.3 99.5
58 50.4
93 73.3
Vermont
Republican Percentages
1856 1857 1858 1859 1860 1861 1862 1863 1864 1865 1866
74.3 67.1 68.5 68.4
71 78.8 88.5 71.2 71.8 75.7 75.1
Connecticut
Republican Percentages
1867 1868 1869 1870 1871 1872 1873 1874 1875 1876 1878
49.5 49.1 50.2 49.5 50.1
50 45.2 46.1 43.9
48 46.7
Maine
Republican Percentages
1865 1866 1867 1868 1869 1870 1871 1872 1873 1874 1875
63.3 62.4 55.6 57.3 53.3 54.1 55.1 56.5 55.9 53.4 51.7
Massachusetts
Republican Percentages
1866 1867 1868 1869 1870 1871 1872 1873 1874 1875 1876
77.5 58.3 67.6 53.5
53 54.9 69.1 54.6
48 48.3 53.6
New Hampshire
Republican Percentages
1868 1869 1870 1871 1872 1873 1874 1875 1876 1877 1878
51.6 52.8
51 48.6 50.8 50.2 47.5 49.6
52 52.3 50.6
Rhode Island
Republican Percentages
1867 1868 1869 1870 1871 1872 1873 1874 1875 1876 1877
69.9 63.7 68.5 62.5 62.2 53.6 71.8 87.5 37.6 45.6 50.9
42
Vermont
Republican Percentages
1867 1868 1869 1870 1872 1874 1876 1878 1880 1882 1884
73.3 73.6 73.5 73.5 71.6 71.7
68 64.3 67.7 69.1 67.3
Connecticut
Republican Percentages
1880 1882 1884 1886 1888 1890 1892 1894 1896 1898 1900
50.5 47.4 48.1 46.2 47.9 47.3 46.6 54.2 62.5 54.2
53
Maine
Republican Percentages
1876 1877 1878 1879 1880 1882 1884 1886 1888 1890 1892
55.5 52.5 44.8 49.5 49.8 52.4 55.4 53.7 54.6 56.4 52.1
Massachusetts
Republican Percentages
1877 1878 1879 1880 1881 1882 1883 1884 1885 1886 1887
49.5 52.6 50.4 58.4 61.2 46.8 51.3 52.4 53.5 50.2 51.1
New Hampshire
Republican Percentages
1879 1880 1882 1884 1886 1888 1890 1892 1894 1896 1898
50.3 51.6 50.4 50.3 48.9 49.5 49.3 50.2
56 61.4 54.2
Rhode Island
Republican Percentages
1878 1879 1880 1881 1882 1883 1884 1885 1886 1887 1888
58.1 62.1 44.8
67 64.8 54.5 62.4
56 53.4
43 52.3
Vermont
Republican Percentages
1886 1888 1890 1892 1894 1896 1898 1900 1902 1904 1906
66 69.9 62.1 65.2 73.6 76.4
71 72.2 45.6 72.2 60.1
Connecticut
Republican Percentages
1902 1904 1906 1908 1910 1912 1914 1916 1918 1920 1922
53.4 54.9 54.8 51.9 44.3 35.5 50.4 51.1 50.7
63 52.4
Maine
Republican Percentages
1894 1896 1898 1900 1902 1904 1906 1908 1910 1912 1914
64.3 66.9 62.9 62.3 59.5 58.5
52 51.6 45.9
50 41.6
Massachusetts
Republican Percentages
1888 1889 1890 1891 1892 1893 1894 1895 1896 1897 1898
52.7 48.4
46 47.1 48.4 52.8 56.5 56.8 67.1 61.2 60.2
New Hampshire
Republican Percentages
1900 1902 1904 1906 1908 1910 1912 1914 1916 1918 1920
59.4 53.2 57.8 49.8 50.4 53.4
39 55.2 53.2 54.1 59.6
Rhode Island
Republican Percentages
1889 1890 1891 1892 1893 1894 1895 1896 1897 1898 1899
39.1 45.1 46.2 50.2 46.3 53.2 56.9 56.4 58.1 57.7 56.4
43
Vermont
Republican Percentages
1908 1910 1912 1914 1916 1918 1920 1922 1924 1926 1928
70.8 64.2 40.5 59.5 71.1 67.2
78 74.8 79.3 60.9 73.5
Connecticut
Republican Percentages
1924 1926 1928 1930 1932 1934 1936 1938 1940 1942 1944
66.2 63.6 53.6 48.6 47.1 45.2 41.1 36.4 47.8 48.9 50.5
Maine
Republican Percentages
1916 1918 1920 1922 1924 1926 1928 1930 1932 1934 1936
54 52.3 65.9
58 57.2 55.5 69.3 55.1 49.3 45.9
56
Massachusetts
Republican Percentages
1899 1900 1901 1902 1903 1904 1905 1906 1907 1908 1909
56.5 59.1 57.3 49.2 50.4 44.1 50.5
52 50.3 51.6 48.6
New Hampshire
Republican Percentages
1922 1924 1926 1928 1930 1932 1934 1936 1938 1940 1942
46.7 53.9 59.7 57.5
58 54.2 50.6 56.6 57.1 50.7 52.2
Rhode Island
Republican Percentages
1900 1901 1902 1903 1904 1905 1906 1907 1908 1909 1910
54.3 53.6
41 47.2 48.9 53.3 47.9 46.9 52.6
57 49.6
Vermont
Republican Percentages
1930 1932 1934 1936 1938 1940 1942 1944 1946 1948 1950
71 61.7 57.3 60.9 66.8
64 77.9 65.9 80.3 71.9 74.5
Connecticut
Republican Percentages
1946 1948 1950 1954 1958 1962 1966 1970 1974 1978 1982
54.4
49 49.7 49.2
37 46.8 44.3 53.8 39.9 40.7 45.9
Maine
Republican Percentages
1938 1940 1942 1944 1946 1948 1950 1952 1954 1956 1958
52.9 63.8 66.8 70.3 61.3 65.6 60.5 52.1 45.5 40.8
48
Massachusetts
Republican Percentages
1910 1911 1912 1913 1914 1915 1916 1917 1918 1919 1920
44.1
47 30.2 25.3 43.4
47 52.5 58.3 50.9 60.9
67
New Hampshire
Republican Percentages
1944 1946 1948 1950 1952 1954 1956 1958 1960 1962 1964
53.1 63.1 52.2
57 63.2 55.1 54.7 51.7 55.5 41.1 33.2
Rhode Island
Republican Percentages
1911 1912 1914 1916 1918 1920 1922 1924 1926 1928 1930
53.4 43.7 53.8 55.9 53.1 64.6 47.2 58.6 53.9 51.6 50.5
Vermont
Republican Percentages
1952 1954 1956 1958 1960 1962 1964 1966 1968 1970 1972
51.9 52.3 57.5 50.3 56.4 49.4 35.1 42.3 55.5
57 43.6
44
Connecticut
Republican Percentages
1986 1990 1994
41.1 37.5 36.1
Maine
Republican Percentages
1960 1962 1966 1970 1974 1978 1982 1986 1990 1994
52.7 50.1 46.9 49.9 23.1 34.3 37.6 39.9 46.7 23.3
Massachusetts
Republican Percentages
1922 1924 1926 1928 1930 1932 1934 1936 1938 1940 1942
52.2
56 58.8 50.1 48.2
45 42.3 46.1 53.3 49.7 54.1
New Hampshire
Republican Percentages
1966 1968 1970 1972 1974 1976 1978 1980 1982 1984 1986
45.9 52.5
46 41.4 51.1 57.7 45.4 40.7 51.4 66.8 53.7
Rhode Island
Republican Percentages
1932 1934 1936 1938 1940 1942 1944 1946 1948 1950 1952
43.5 42.4 45.9 53.7 44.1 41.5 39.4 45.9 38.4 40.7 47.4
Vermont
Republican Percentages
1974 1976 1978 1980 1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994
38 53.4 62.8 58.6
55 48.5 38.2 43.3 51.8
23 19.4
Massachusetts
Republican Percentages
1944 1946 1948 1950 1952 1954 1956 1958 1960 1962 1964
45.9 54.1 40.5 43.1 49.9 51.8 46.9 43.1 52.5 49.7 50.3
New Hampshire
Republican Percentages
1988 1990 1992 1994 1996
60.4 60.2
56 69.9 39.6
Rhode Island
Republican Percentages
1954 1956 1958 1960 1962 1964 1966 1968 1970 1972 1974
41.7 49.9 50.9 43.4 50.1 61.2 63.3
49 49.5 47.1 21.5
Vermont
Republican Percentages
1996
22.6
Massachusetts
Republican Percentages
1966 1970 1974 1978 1982 1986 1990 1994
62.6 56.7 42.3 47.2 36.6 31.2 50.2 70.9
Rhode Island
Republican Percentages
1976 1978 1980 1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1994
44.7 30.7 26.3 23.6
60 64.7 50.8 25.8 47.2
Source: Congressional Quarterly's Guide to U.S. Elections, 1996
45
Bibliography
Cohen, Daniel A. Pillars of Salt, Monuments of Grace: New England Crime Literature
and the Origins of American Popular Culture, 1674-1860. New York: Oxford U
P, 1993.
Corrigan, John. "The Long Argument: English Puritanism and the Shaping of the New
England Culture, 1570-1700." Church History 63 (1994): 291-92.
Fenstermaker, J. and John E. Filer. "The U.S. Embargo Act of 1807." Economic Inquiry
28 (1990): 163-184.
Foster, Stephen. The Long Argument: English Puritanism and the Shaping of the New
England Culture, 1570-1700. Chapel Hill: U of North Carolina P, 1991.
Gately, James J., ed. The Register of the Governors of the States of the United States of
America 1776-1976. Collingswood: Gateford Publications, 1976.
Germond, Jack W., and Jules Witcover. "Inside Politics." National Journal 27(May 6,
1995): 1125.
Glashan, Roy R., ed. American Governors and Gubernatorial Elections 1775-1978.
Westport: Meckler Books, 1979.
Gould, Philip. "New England Witch-Hunting and the Politics of Reason in the Early
Republic." New England Quarterly 68 (1995): 58-82.
Innes, Stephen. Creating the Commonwealth: The Economic Culture of Puritan New
England. New York: W. W. Norton, 1995.
Jacobson, Louis. "Live Free--and Democratic--New Hampshire and Vermont are Being
Led by Governors Who are Moderate Democrats and Whose Popularity Ratings
are Sky-High. What's Going on in New England These Days?" National Journal
29(1997): 1558.
Lamoreaux, Naomi R., and Russell R. Menard. "Insider Lending: Banks, Personal
Connections, and Economic Development in Industrial New England." The
Journal of Interdisciplinary History 27(1996): 345.
Lockard, Duane. New England State Politics. Princeton: Princeton U P, 1959.
Lucas, Paul R. "Solomon Stoddard and the Origin of the Great Awakening in New
England." The Historian 59 (1997). 741-758.
46
Matson, Cathy. "Creating the Commonwealth: The Economic Culture of Puritan New
England." The Journal of Economic History 55 (1995): 948-50.
Mayhew, David R. Two-Party Competition in the New England States. Amherst: Bureau
of Government Research, U of Massachusetts, 1967.
Milburn, Josephine F., and Victoria Schuck, eds. New England Politics. Cambridge:
Schenkman Publishing Company, 1981.
---, and William Doyle, eds. New England Political Parties. Cambridge: Schenkman
Publishing Company, 1983.
New England Governors' Conference. [Online] http://www.tiac.net /users/ negc/
index.html October 24, 1997.
Ross, Richard J. "The Legal Past of Early New England." The William and Mary
Quarterly 50 (1993) 28-41.
Savitch, H.V., and Ronald K. Vogel, eds. Regional Politics: America in a Post-City Age.
Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications, 1996.
Vaughan, Alden T., and Francis J. Bremer, eds. Puritan New England. New York: St.
Martin's Press, 1977.
Weil, Francois. "Capitalism and Industrialization in New England, 1815-1845." The
Journal of American History 84 (March 1998) 1334-1354.
White, John Kenneth. The Fractured Electorate: Political Parties and Social Change
in Southern New England. Hanover: U P of New England, 1983.
47
Notes
1
Republican gubernatorial candidates first ran in 1854 in Maine, 1855 in Massachusetts, and 1857 in
New Hampshire.
2
David R. Mayhew, Two-Party Competition in the New England States. 1967, pg. 15.
3
Duane Lockard, New England State Politics. 1959, pg. 5.
4
Duane Lockard, New England State Politics. 1959, pg. 5.
5
Duane Lockard, New England State Politics. 1959, pg. 3.
6
Duane Lockard, New England State Politics. 1959, pp. 4-5.
7
Alden T. Vaughan and Francis J. Bremer, eds., Puritan New England, pg. vii.
8
Paul R. Lucas, "Solomon Stoddard and the Origin of the Great Awakening in New England," pp. 741742.
9
Duane Lockard, New England State Politics. 1959, pg. 3.
10
Philip Gould, "New England Witch-Hunting and the Politics of Reason in the Early Republic," pg. 59.
11
Philip Gould, "New England Witch-Hunting and the Politics of Reason in the Early Republic," pp. 6263.
12
Philip Gould, "New England Witch-Hunting and the Politics of Reason in the Early Republic," pg. 59.
13
Richard J. Ross, "The Legal Past of Early New England," pg. 32.
14
Richard J. Ross, "The Legal Past of Early New England," pg. 36.
15
Richard J. Ross, "The Legal Past of Early New England," pg. 39.
16
Duane Lockard, New England State Politics. 1959, pp. 3-7.
17
Duane Lockard, New England State Politics. 1959, pg. 3.
18
Cathy Matson, "Creating the Commonwealth: The Economic Culture of Puritan New England," pg.
948.
19
J. Fenstermaker and John E. Filer, "The U.S. Embargo Act of 1807," pg. 166.
20
Duane Lockard, New England State Politics. 1959, pg. 3.
21
Duane Lockard, New England State Politics. 1959, pg. 4.
22
Josephine F. Milburn and Victoria Schuck, eds., New England Politics, pg. xi.
23
Josephine F. Milburn and Victoria Schuck, eds., New England Politics, pp. xi-xii.
24
Josephine F. Milburn and Victoria Schuck, eds., New England Politics, pg. xii.
25
Duane Lockard, New England State Politics. 1959, pg. 4.
26
GOP candidates won by plurality in 1902 and 1912
27
Josephine F. Milburn and William Doyle, eds., New England Political Parties, pg. 119.
28
Josephine F. Milburn and William Doyle, eds., New England Political Parties, pg. 119.
29
Josephine F. Milburn and William Doyle, eds., New England Political Parties, pg. 119.
30
Josephine F. Milburn and William Doyle, eds., New England Political Parties, pg. 120.
31
Josephine F. Milburn and Victoria Schuck, eds., New England Politics, pg. 2.
32
The earlier loss was to a Fusion candidate.
33
Union (Republican) candidates ran unopposed in both 1862 and 1865 in Rhode Island, receiving 99.5%
and 93%, respectively.
34
Josephine F. Milburn and William Doyle, eds., New England Political Parties, pg. 245.
35
Josephine F. Milburn and William Doyle, eds., New England Political Parties, pg. 185.
36
Josephine F. Milburn and William Doyle, eds., New England Political Parties, pg. 187.
37
Josephine F. Milburn and William Doyle, eds., New England Political Parties, pg. 188.
38
Josephine F. Milburn and William Doyle, eds., New England Political Parties, pg. 187.
39
Josephine F. Milburn and William Doyle, eds., New England Political Parties, pg. 185.
40
Josephine F. Milburn and William Doyle, eds., New England Political Parties, pg. 186.
41
Josephine F. Milburn and William Doyle, eds., New England Political Parties, pg. 201.
42
Josephine F. Milburn and William Doyle, eds., New England Political Parties, pg. 187.
43
Josephine F. Milburn and William Doyle, eds., New England Political Parties, pg. 190.
44
Massachusetts's median score of 51.9 percent is virtually equal to Rhode Island's 51.6 percent.
48
45
Josephine F. Milburn and William Doyle, eds., New England Political Parties, pg. 97.
Josephine F. Milburn and William Doyle, eds., New England Political Parties, pg. 98.
47
Josephine F. Milburn and William Doyle, eds., New England Political Parties, pg. 98.
48
Josephine F. Milburn and William Doyle, eds., New England Political Parties, pg. 100.
49
Duane Lockard, New England State Politics. 1959, pg. 228.
50
Josephine F. Milburn and William Doyle, eds., New England Political Parties, pg. 12.
51
Josephine F. Milburn and William Doyle, eds., New England Political Parties, pg. 12.
52
Josephine F. Milburn and William Doyle, eds., New England Political Parties, pg. 139.
53
Josephine F. Milburn and William Doyle, eds., New England Political Parties, pg. 139.
54
Duane Lockard, New England State Politics. 1959, pg. 3.
55
Josephine F. Milburn and Victoria Schuck, eds., New England Politics, pg. 1.
46
49